Donnie Berkholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What is your goal? Is there something you're trying to accomplish that's
impossible? It's clear that changing this would be a fair amount of
work, and I don't understand the benefits.
With the current size of system packages set, having a complete
On Tue, January 8, 2008 1:29 pm, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
It's my pleasure to introduce Jean-Noël Rivasseau (elvanor) as a new
Gentoo developer. He will start by working in the Java team, and I
hear there are plans for a new eclass soonish.
Jean-Noël currently lives in Paris, France, but he
Denis Dupeyron wrote:
Jean-Noël currently lives in Paris, France, but he studied in
Vancouver, Canada for some time. He is 26 and happily married. Apart
from computers, he has a passion for games (video, role-playing and
boardgames), music (progressive metal rock), and outdoors
(especially
Hi,
Don't worry, I may very well return to Vancouver some day as I really love
the place. Actually, I am thinking of returning there on Autumn 2008 for at
least 6 monthes. I wonder if I can be part of two conspiracies at once?!
Jean-Noël
On 1/8/08, Robin H. Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 01:29:43PM +0100, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
Jean-No??l currently lives in Paris, France, but he studied in
Vancouver, Canada for some time.
Why'd you leave Vancouver? We need to get a Vancouver conspiracy going
again, there hasn't been one since mr_bones_ ran away! (hey, 4
Pierre-Yves Rofes a écrit :
On Tue, January 8, 2008 1:29 pm, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
So please give a warm welcome to Jean-Noël as a new Gentoo developer.
Yay for the french conspiracy growing yet again :)
We'll have to have another conspiracy beer-meeting then ;)
Welcome to you Jean-Noël!
As a gentoo user (developpers will do, i am sure), i wish you a good arrival
!
2008/1/8, Rémi Cardona [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pierre-Yves Rofes a écrit :
On Tue, January 8, 2008 1:29 pm, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
So please give a warm welcome to Jean-Noël as a new Gentoo developer.
Yay for the
Stefan Hellermann kirjoitti:
I've tried to not use the system-set and set up a virtual called
virtual/minimal-system which depends on all the packages I need (no gcc
or perl, only coreutils, glibc, baselayout and some packages that are
really needed for booting up). This is what I think
On Tue, Jan 08, 2008 at 01:37:28PM +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Petten?? wrote:
Santiago M. Mola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Having a complete
deptree and having a small system package set should be independent
goals, maybe your proposal should focus on making possible to have a
deptree as
As always, I'd like a status report on Code of Conduct, with three
questions in mind:
1) Do we have an implementation schedule? ;
2) Have we identified some warm bodies for it?;
3) Most devrel requests seem really to relate to CoC violations. Would
you like us to bounce those to the CoC
Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Don't suppose you have a url for their reasoning?
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=151758
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò
http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
On 07-01-2008 22:31:54 +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we
going to do?
Please project leaders try to reply in short.
Gentoo/Alt:Prefix
Are we fine?
Sure.
- reached 10% coverage/replication of the gentoo-x86 tree
- convinced two
On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 04:32 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:20:18 -0800
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No offense to anyone, but holding back hundreds of developers and
thousands of users for a handful of developers
...and how exactly are hundreds of
Ferris McCormick wrote:
As always, I'd like a status report on Code of Conduct, with
three questions in mind:
1) Do we have an implementation schedule?
It is already being enforced by a variety of teams as they find it
applicable.
2) Have we identified some warm bodies for it?
Good
On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 23:34 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Ok, so explain:
* How perpetually open bugs are a maintenance burden. They don't
generate emails and they don't require any work on the maintainer's
part. Is the mere fact that they show up in queries all you're
concerned about, and
On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 23:35 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:09:24 +0100
Matthias Langer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This kind of conversation is not technical at all... Ciaranm, are you
a MIPS user? If so, do you think that running KEYWORDS=mips is less
likely to result
On Sun, 2008-01-06 at 11:36 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
that has both sides happy here, but that won't happen if you don't admit
there's a problem.
He doesn't have to admit anything. He is neither an ebuild maintainer
nor an arch team developer. Basically, his opinion is useless in this
case, as
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 00:30 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On 00:42 Tue 08 Jan , Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
Anyway, as having a complete dependency tree is almost impossible
because of that, I have an alternative proposal: reducing the size of
the system package set. Right now
On Tuesday, 08. January 2008 22:44:17 Chrissy Fullam wrote:
'bodies' would be needed to enforce CoC on #gentoo-dev
I don't really see any need for moderation on #gentoo-dev. We've managed
quite nicely without big brothers watching us so far and I think we
should simply keep doing that.
Yes,
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 19:59 +, Ferris McCormick wrote:
3) Most devrel requests seem really to relate to CoC violations. Would
you like us to bounce those to the CoC people, process them using CoC
rules, or keep doing what we are doing now (generally, close them with a
note explaining why
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 21:49 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote:
Stefan Hellermann kirjoitti:
I've tried to not use the system-set and set up a virtual called
virtual/minimal-system which depends on all the packages I need (no gcc
or perl, only coreutils, glibc, baselayout and some packages that
Chris Gianelloni kirjoitti:
On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 21:49 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote:
Stefan Hellermann kirjoitti:
I've tried to not use the system-set and set up a virtual called
virtual/minimal-system which depends on all the packages I need (no gcc
or perl, only coreutils, glibc, baselayout
Alec Warner wrote:
On 1/8/08, William L. Thomson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To keep it short and sweet. Our current structure is FUBARed.
Foundation? Trustees? Election? Nominees? Ball dropped, shall we pick it
up and resume a game?
Gentoo does not exist legally. NPO filings in New
Wooo !
Mail subject screwing (yes i18n conspiracy is always just behind :D)
A bit late but you know, work and stuff... Welcome !
--
Gilles Dartiguelongue [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:04:49 -0800
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have foo 1.0, which is mips. There is foo 2.0, which is stable
everywhere else. The foo 1.0 ebuild does not conform to current
ebuild standards. I want to commit changes to foo 2.0, and repoman
won't allow me due
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:38:07 -0800
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 02:17 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Oh. Yeah. Because people with an attitude like yours think that the
correct way to fix a repoman message is to start nuking arch
keywords, ignoring what it
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:44:22 -0800
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh... So where do the original problems come from? Are you saying
that packages mysteriously start breaking on their own because
no-one's maintaining them?
Of course they do
Ah, right. Because of the magical elf that
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh... So where do the original problems come from? Are you saying
that packages mysteriously start breaking on their own because
no-one's maintaining them?
Of course they do
Ah, right. Because of the magical elf that lives in
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 02:47 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:44:22 -0800
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh... So where do the original problems come from? Are you saying
that packages mysteriously start breaking on their own because
no-one's maintaining them?
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 02:47 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:44:22 -0800
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh... So where do the original problems come from? Are you saying
that packages mysteriously start breaking on their own because
no-one's maintaining them?
On 1/8/08, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:38:07 -0800
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 02:17 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Oh. Yeah. Because people with an attitude like yours think that the
correct way to fix a repoman
31 matches
Mail list logo
